Town Planner Pro
Search appeal decisions

Planning appeal decision

Dismissed17 November 20253366038

Smack Nightclub, Tavistock Street, LEAMINGTON SPA, CV32 5PJ

demolition of existing two storey nightclub building and erection of five storey building containing ten purpose-built student apartments. Appeal B: APP/T3725/Y/25/3359294 5-9 Tavistock Street, Leamington Spa, Warwickshire CV32 5PJ

Authority
Warwick District Council
Appeal type
major · Planning Appeal
Procedure
Hearing
Development
residential · Other Major Developments
Inspector
Thompson P

Main issues, as the Inspector framed them

  • whether the appeal building is situated within the curtilage of the Grade II* listed building, 'Numbers 12-42 and Attached Railings to Numbers 16 and 18 and 20a, Parade', and thereby should be considered as part of the listed building
  • notwithstanding whether the appeal building is situated within the curtilage of the listed building, whether the proposal would preserve the listed building, and any features of special historic interest that it possesses, including its setting; and the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the site and its surroundings, including whether it would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Royal Leamington Spa Conservation Area
  • whether the proposal would provide acceptable living conditions for the future occupiers of the proposed development, with regard to the potential for noise and odour nuisance to occur from the neighbouring restaurant, known as La Coppola (Appeals A and C only)
  • whether the proposed developments would make suitable provision for local services, in relation to local green space and road safety initiatives (Appeals A and C only)

What decided it

The less than substantial harm to the listed building and conservation area was not outweighed by the public benefits of the schemes, compounded by the failure to secure acceptable living conditions for future occupiers regarding odour.

The great weight to heritage asset conservation and the less than substantial harm identified, together with harm from unacceptable living conditions (odour), attracted substantial weight against the schemes which was not outweighed by the moderate weight of housing, economic, social and limited heritage benefits.

Framework references: 61, 125, 212, 215

Plan policies cited: Policy HE1, Policy BE3, Policy HS4, Policy DM1, Policy TR1, Policy BE1, Policy CC1, Policy RLS3

Judgments cited: Holborn Studios Ltd v The Council of the London Borough of Hackney [2017] EWHC 2823 (Admin)

The main issues and the deciding factor are read from the published letter by Town Planner Pro; the letter itself is the record. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Research, not advice.

In the app this decision sits on the map beside every other appeal around it, with the full reasoning summary, the letter held on file, and the case law it applies.